A COVID-19 vaccine is needed now, but timelines (12-18 months) create large market risk. By the time a vaccine is ready, the crisis may have passed. A CGD Note explores three options: business as usual – which may lead to promotion of an inferior vaccine or fierce country competition for supply – and two models (cost- or value-based), with countries pre-committing to purchases meeting specified efficacy. The authors prefer a value-based model.
Adrian Towse presented evidence that transparency of process reduced corruption and improved competition. Evidence was, however, against price transparency for on-patent medicines. It will reduce access in low income countries. In generic markets, price transparency could improve efficiency, although it risks collusion by suppliers. There is therefore a case for buyers sharing, but not publishing, price data for off-patent medicines.
People living in Middle and Low Income Countries (MLICs) do not get access to innovative treatments and new treatments meeting MLIC requirements do not come to market. These issues should be addressed through a demand-side approach— better payer policy in MLICs, supported by international actors, to speed development and dissemination. An Innovation Uptake Institute (IUI) can serve as an honest broker between country payers and suppliers.
OHE Lunchtime Seminar with Alistair McGuire, 3rd February 2020. The seminar will present some preliminary thoughts on the promises offered by personalised medicine that it will allow efficient identification of different target groups and consequently more effective treatment.
New research by the Office of Health Economics (OHE) concludes the proposed International Price Index effectively outsources pharmaceutical policy decisions to countries that “give the government a central role” vs. the U.S.’ greater reliance on the private market.
OHE, in collaboration with RAND Europe, University College London (UCL) and University of Manchester (UoM), has been awarded a new research grant from Cancer Research UK in partnership with Greater Manchester Health & Social Care Partnership (GMHSCP) to further explore the potential of implementing outcome-based payments for cancer treatments.
This research by a team of OHE and IHE researchers estimates the value added by second generation antipsychotics over their life-cycle in the UK and Sweden. It concludes that considering the entire life-cycle, the value added by SGAs to the system is higher than the expected value estimated at launch. P&R decisions should consider the value added by medicines over the long-run.
A new publication in the European Journal of Health Economics identifies potential challenges of ATMPs in view of current health technology assessment (HTA) methodology and explores potential solutions to these challenges. Three key topics are explored: uncertainty, discounting, and health outcomes and value. A series of recommendations are proposed.
The Center for Global Development and the Office of Health Economics are working on a new approach to drive the next generation of investment for better tuberculosis treatment. Our market-focused approach puts Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (the BRICS) governments in the driver’s seat—empowering them to send a powerful signal to private-sector pharmaceutical companies about the innovation they value and at the kind of price they are willing to consider.